Harned is now expressing concern about the rising tide of agency power and the need for the separation of powers.
[Whitehouse has replaced Grassley as the lone senator.]
Harned: Over-regulation is a problem for small businesses that gets exacerbated by Chevron deference to agencies.
Harned: NFIB welcomes Gorsuch's comments in Gutierez about re-considering Chevron deference.
Harned: Separation of powers is important for the vitality of small business.
Eve Hill is last witness on this panel. She has experience with laws relating to people with disabilities.
Hill says Gorsuch bakes "the soft bigotry of low expectations" into disabilities law
Hill: IDEA requires a free appropriate public education for each student with a disability.
As we've heard earlier today, Hill now turns to Gorsuch's holding that only "only more than de minimis" support necessary.
Hill is outlining the problems in her view with Gorsuch's holding in the Luke P case. Luke's father testified earlier today.
Hill: Gorsuch's opinions reflect the very stereotypes about adults with disabilities that Congress means to reject.
Hill now turns to a case, Wong v. Kansas State University. This involves a professor requesting leave.
Hill: IDEA does not just ask what an employee is contractually entitled to, but what is a "reasonable accommodation." Gorsuch does not view things this way.
Kennedy has taken over charing. He turns to Hatch, who with Coons has now joined.
Hatch first asks Turley about litmus tests.
Turley: Gorsuch has a well-known jurisprudence.
Turley: This is like Scalia, who came to the court with a clear idea of his jurisprudence.
Turley: What we know about Scalia is that he is a textualist with an intense intellectual curiosity and independence.
Turley: What we have in Gorsuch is not something who did not participate in debates, but someone who got involved.
Asked about Chevron, Turley says he shares Gorsuch's views on Chevron. Depends on whether it is viewed on constitutional standpoint or an administrative one.
Turley: From a constitutional standpoint, Chevron is troubling for agencies usurping role of this body. Rome will not burn without Chevron. We will be in the same place we were before Chevron.
Turley: There's not a cliff here. By moving away from Chevron, the court's are more heavily involved in agency decision-making and re-empowering this body.
Hatch next turns to Harned, from NFIB.
Harned: Small-business owners can have the most impact with legislators. They need to know that once you enact a law, they can rely on it. [This is versus Chevron deference.]
Whitehouse up next, adds to the record a multiple reports by Demos (president McGhee present) about money in politics
Now turning to McGhee and thanking her for Demos' work: Trump originally outsourced the creation of the list from which Gorsuch was selected to two right-wing interest groups [Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society], and Gorsuch says he was first contacted by Leonard Leo [head of Federalist Society], also reported that the White House has given over reins of Gorsuch grass-roots support given to a $10 million operation. [Whitehouse calls this a front group, the same one that disrupted Merrick Garland]
Whitehouse also mentions a contact of Gorsuch's in Colorado -- a billionaire donor
During the questioning, Whitehouse expressed lots of concern about "dark money" in politics.
McGhee cites again that 97 percent of Trump voters apparently want less money in politics as well
McGhee: I was concerned during hearings, when asked by Whitehouse, instead of saying there is a public interest in knowing who is buying influence with politicians, Gorsuch was quite evasive and said disclosure chills speech
McGhee: Aghast [my word not hers, but close] that Gorsuch would compare donors to NCAAP leaders
Kennedy, still chairing, now turns to Grassley, asking Solum about originalism
For the previous panel, mostly Democratic senators spoke to their witnesses about potentially disparaging things about Gorsuch's record. Now so far more Republicans have asked majority witnesses to say good things about Gorsuch or to clarify things in a good way for Gorsuch.
Solum is now explaining about originalism. He says the Constitutions that sets boundaries both conservatives and liberals can welcome
Solum now turns to Justice Thomas' opinion in McDonald case saying that the Bill of Rights should be incorporated under Privileges and Immunities Clause. This clause only applies to citizens, which would not include corporations. He suggests that corporations would not welcome this decision, but it comes from the original meaning of the Constitution.
Grassley next asked Lamken if Gorsuch's experience as trial lawyer would be relevant on SCOTUS
Lamken: That experience establishes great respect for rule of law and gives insight into how law works. This insight is lacking on the current SCOTUS.
Grassley to Harden: Why is it important for small business owners that judges hew to the text?
Harned: Small business owners need to know what the law is.
Flake now chairing, turns to Coons
Coons: Was Gorsuch following precedent in Luke P case?
Hill: I don't think so. And that's what SCOTUS said yesterday.